Re: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread

[Eric Piel]

06/11/2005 01:04 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote/a Ãcrit:
> > Just a small change to "1 - QoS":
> >
> >
> > > b.	For each service:
> > >
> > > 	i.	Probability of missing a deadline due to software,
> > > 		ranging from 0 to 1, with the value of 1 corresponding
> > > 		to the hardest possible hard realtime.
> >
> > I think it should be (by reference to how you define probability at the 
> > beginning of the section):
> > Probability of not missing any deadline due to software
>
>
> Good catch!  How about the following?
>
> 	i.      Probability of meeting a deadline due to software,
> 		ranging from 0 to 1, with the value of 1 corresponding
> 		to the hardest possible hard realtime.
>
> Changing "missing" in the original to "meeting".

It sounds strange to me (but english is not my mother tongue), it's like 
hardware was not so good but software helped to recover the situation 
and, eventually, the deadline was met ;-)

What about using the way you wrote it at the beginning of the section:
"Probability of missing a deadline only because of a hardware failure"

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/